2009 Hyundai Sonata Gls Sedan 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

Hyundai's electric car strategy takes shape under the radar

Green car fans are frothing over the Tesla Model 3. The Chevy Bolt may turn out to be the better car, and it will be available sooner. But don't overlook another electric car that's also due next year: the Hyundai Ioniq. With far less attention, Hyundai is launching an EV that is expected to be competitively priced and will spearhead the Ioniq lineup, which also has hybrid and plug-in hybrid versions. They share the same platform and look similar, but the Ioniq EV could prove to be a game-changer for Hyundai when it arrives at the end of the year, bringing new customers and casting the company as one with proficiency in the electric arena. Built in South Korea, the Ioniq line will be available at every Hyundai dealership that wants to sell the cars, already giving it a leg up on Teslas that often have long waiting periods for buyers. With a range of 124 miles on a single charge, it won't compete with the Model 3, which will travel at least 215 miles on a charge, or the Bolt, which has a range of 238 miles. Rather, it will face off against humbler products like the Nissan Leaf (107 miles) and the Volkswagen E-Golf (83 miles). Hyundai has not announced pricing, but is mindful the Ioniq trails Chevy and Tesla in range. An executive also indicated it could be working on an Ioniq with a longer distance capability, but declined to discuss specifics. Hyundai argues its found a sweet spot with the Ioniq EV, whose range is well within the distance most Americans drive in a day. It can recharge in about four hours and 25 minutes, which is faster than the six-hour charge time for the Leaf but slightly longer than the four-hour E-Golf. In quick charge mode, the Ioniq can juice up to 80 percent in 23 minutes. Critically, Hyundai is also offering a lifetime warranty on all of its hybrid and electric battery packs (it has since 2012), which could sway consumers still wary of the technology. It's a lot of numbers, and Hyundai will need considerable marketing muscle to make buyers consider Ioniqs in the face of a growing field of electrified competitors. But it's part of a broader play to reach an audience of younger consumers, who expect electrification to be baked into their cars. Millennials will account for 40 percent of new car purchases by 2020, and Hyundai says the generation is more likely to consider alternative powertrains than older ones.

2016 Hyundai Veloster Turbo Rally Edition Quick Spin [w/video]

Our year-long test of the Hyundai Veloster Turbo was a mixed experience. There were plenty of not-very-nice anecdotes about the blown Hyundai – at one point, our own Managing Editor Steve Ewing suggested we "stop thinking of the Veloster Turbo as a proper hot hatch," and Senior Editor Seyth Miersma said it was a car that "doesn't feel especially hot-hatchy." We felt this way despite the car's overt hot-hatch trappings: the red turbo badging, matte-gray paint, upgraded body kit, huge center-exit exhaust pipes, and sticky Michelin tires. Our reaction to this Rally Edition was lukewarm when it debuted earlier this year at the Chicago Auto Show. You can imagine, then, our trepidation with the arrival of the matte blue tester. As it turned out, a week behind the wheel proved that Hyundai has addressed a number of the complaints we lodged during our prior year-long Veloster test. Driving Notes There was only so much Hyundai could do to the Veloster during this year's mid-cycle refresh. That means the 1.6-liter, turbocharged four-cylinder is still there, writing checks its performance can't cash. We still get 201 horsepower and 195 pound-feet of torque, the latter of which is available between 1,750 and 4,500 rpm. Despite the generous torque spread, there's no sense of urgency with this engine. Pair that with the still persistent turbo lag, and the Veloster Turbo feels slower from behind the wheel than other hot hatches, even less powerful competitors like the Fiat 500 Abarth. There were a number of complaints about our Veloster Turbo's fuel economy during our year behind the wheel. At 24 miles per gallon, this Rally Edition managed to come in just under the EPA-estimated 25-mpg city rating, improving measurably on the less than 22 mpg Senior Editor Miersma returned in his long-term wrap-up. Still, we were four mpg below the 28-mpg combined rating in what was largely mixed driving. Aside from the unchanged powertrain, the Rally Edition brings a lot to the Veloster Turbo package worth liking. The inclusion of a B&M Racing short-throw shifter makes this gearbox not only easier but also far more enjoyable to manipulate, although the gearing is still too tall for our taste. The shift knob is just the right size, and the shift action feels rifle-bolt precise. It is delightful, aside from an annoying, almost inexcusable flaw, which you can see in the video below.